Jump to content


Photo

Walkers vs Tanks


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
75 replies to this topic

#61 Mercutio

Mercutio

    № 1

  • Nova Member
  • 1,661 posts

Posted 16 September 2008 - 06:51 AM

QUOTE (DS9 @ Sep 16 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hovertanks can cross even oceans if they really have to, so kinda useless to mention the depth of rivers since hover units don't work like that tongue.gif


Unless Scorp changed the tech, hover vehicles sink when they go over water.

http://threemileisland.forumotion.org/

http://enfiladedefilade.blogspot.com/


#62 DS9

DS9

    Private First Class

  • Member
  • 126 posts

Posted 16 September 2008 - 05:27 PM

QUOTE (Mercutio @ Sep 16 2008, 10:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Unless Scorp changed the tech, hover vehicles sink when they go over water.


doesn't depend on scorp, he aint the all mighty god that desides what does what wink.gif Scorp is a cool guy, i know. but doesnt mean he is the one that makes the rules of such things. A hovertank is simular to a hovercrasft, the difference is that the hovertank can hover higher and has weaponry. the rest is pretty much the same idea.
Play nice, build fair, don't steal!

My Brickshelf
My MOCpages
My MOCpages Fan Group

#63 Kostchei

Kostchei

    Not a Bumble Bee...

  • Member
  • -88 posts

Posted 16 September 2008 - 06:50 PM

As awesome as Walkers are, I think I'm gonna have to go with tanks. Tanks just have a certain feel to them that a walker simply cannot inspire IMO.

Posted Image


#64 Kampfer

Kampfer

    Hard Core Kiwi

  • Nova Member
  • 156 posts

Posted 16 September 2008 - 07:00 PM

QUOTE (DS9 @ Sep 17 2008, 07:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
doesn't depend on scorp, he aint the all mighty god that desides what does what wink.gif Scorp is a cool guy, i know. but doesnt mean he is the one that makes the rules of such things. A hovertank is simular to a hovercrasft, the difference is that the hovertank can hover higher and has weaponry. the rest is pretty much the same idea.


Actual here it does. This is creation we're talking about, and if he say's hover vehical's sink instead of flying over water then they do.

To become old and wise, You must first be young and stupid.

 


#65 DS9

DS9

    Private First Class

  • Member
  • 126 posts

Posted 17 September 2008 - 01:10 AM

QUOTE (Kampfer @ Sep 17 2008, 11:05 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Actual here it does. This is creation we're talking about, and if he say's hover vehical's sink instead of flying over water then they do.


think you forget about freedom of speech in that case,and besides. i made several hovertanks including a whole series.
Play nice, build fair, don't steal!

My Brickshelf
My MOCpages
My MOCpages Fan Group

#66 Wang Fire

Wang Fire

    Accidental Mahlok Expert

  • Nova Member
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 17 September 2008 - 01:17 AM

QUOTE (DS9 @ Sep 17 2008, 10:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
think you forget about freedom of speech in that case,and besides. i made several hovertanks including a whole series.

...

Again, we are debating the capabilities/effectiveness of vehicles in Nova Refuge, not real life. Let's all remember the difference between fanon and canon, and accept that what the CREATOR says goes. No point in planting Epileptic Trees if you know they're just going to get Jossed. Then again this'll keep happening as long as any one person sees the slimmest possibility of getting an "I Knew It!" in, so...

Last Series Watched: RWBY

Last Movie Watched: Girls und Panzer der Film____Last Game Played: Battlefleet Gothic: Armada

Playlist of the Moment: Panzercraft____Song of the Moment: Seven Nation Army - The White Stripes/Glitch Mob

Last Blog Entry: On Gods and Daemons____Last Book Read: Prospero Burns


#67 Moonlight

Moonlight

    Leave Luck To Heaven

  • Nova Member
  • 3,781 posts

Posted 17 September 2008 - 01:14 PM

QUOTE (DS9 @ Sep 16 2008, 04:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
In a way every vehicle has a "head", the tank has its turret (well... in most cases) but also the driver position.... without that the tank can not move. You got to see where you are going to else you will be blind! This also counts for mech's, walkers, and other vehicles. Without a "head", or command position AKA cockpit, you can not use the vehicle. so that's utter nonsense. Even a droid has a "head" in some way, it's brain. Without it it simply wont move! Talking about balance, well a tank is balanced without even adding joints or legs or what ever. So the tank wins that without any debate possible. A hardsuit isn't better then a walker, never claimed that part. I said it's better in streets and small areas like corridors. Since a walker or mech can not enter that because of it's size. So in cities for example it might be smart to use a hardsuit instead of a mech or walkers.

Yes I played Mechwarrior games, It's a game from my time (ugh I'm getting old). Walkers can not fly, mecha's (as in the game) can for short periods of time. It aint even real flying either but hopping.

...

Wow. You obviously didn't understand what I meant. Especially because you're obviously lying about you playing Mechwarrior, because if you haven't realized; they're equipped with jump-jets. And you're kinda trying to misuse the definition of a head, AKA 'the upper part of the body in humans, joined to the trunk by the neck, containing the brain, eyes, ears, nose, and mouth. '. Standard walkers (and Scorp's.) do not contain this feature. The walkers that Scorp has is mounted on the 'chest' area. Adding a head is pointless, as, again, unless you're mounting something on it; would be redundant and pointless, it provides too much of a target and screams 'destroy me' in every language except Borg. Yes, a tank has a turret, but is it elevated three stories off the ground and the size of a small pizzeria? A tank turret is a low profile, relatively hard to hit component that also DOES NOT CONTAIN THE PILOT OR SENSORY EQUIPMENT, and the driver section is certainly not pointed out by an ostentatious human-shaped head component. The chest is simply better because it's a lower profile and provides a more stable field of view. And I DESPISE it when people say that mecha are faster then mechs because they have 'faster jump-jets' or whatever bullocks they come up with. If it can be mounted on a mecha, it can be mounted on a walker. There's no considerable weight difference between the two that would allow one to go faster then the other, in fact, if walkers were lighter; the boost in speed would be marginal, especially because if it needs to move effectively on it's jump-jets alone, why have the legs? All they do is weigh it down and moving in a human jointed mech would have a 50% chance of falling over, a 100% chance of it if it's tipped over by any form of weaponry.

Next, how would a 'hovertank' somehow fly higher then a hovercraft? A 'hovertank' would essentially be a massive 30 ton weapons platform mounted on hover technology, conversely, a hovercraft is much lighter weighing about a third of that weight. If they're investing in more powerful hover technology exclusively for tanks, that's an idiotic decision, especially if it overcompensates weight so that you're floating HIGHER then a much lighter craft. Though, hovercraft DO have weapons; the military today already mount automatic guns to hovercraft. Besides, you act like it rains money. You realize how expensive it is to equip hover technology? You act like every tank can float on a bed of air, in fact; none can't. That's why the tread system will likely be used for a long, long time to come; and that's why it's being used in NR. You act like that having hover technology has no downsides, which actually comes down to three things. Cost, maintenance (hovercraft today are a complete frustration to maintain.) and power supply (I COULD fly over the ocean, though likely my engine would die a couple dozen miles out.

We also AREN'T comparing real life tanks today to fictional things because we haven't really directly compared the two. AKA we haven't said the M1 Abrams would be destroyed by a walker. And walkers are allowed to do 'whatever they can do' as they're portrayed in the movies because that's the ONLY PLACE WHERE THEY'VE BEEN CREATED. The walker concept is a simple concept being studied and tested by military scientists, we haven't created any practical models. That's something that everyone knows. Or, at least, that's what I thought. We're comparing the two ideas because that's the whole point of the debate. Which is better? Dependable tanks? Or versatile walkers?

I won't even elaborate on your further posts.

tumblr_nk2f3wRCMa1si48w3o1_1280.png


#68 Mercutio

Mercutio

    № 1

  • Nova Member
  • 1,661 posts

Posted 17 September 2008 - 01:20 PM

QUOTE (DS9 @ Sep 17 2008, 07:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
doesn't depend on scorp, he aint the all mighty god that desides what does what wink.gif Scorp is a cool guy, i know. but doesnt mean he is the one that makes the rules of such things. A hovertank is simular to a hovercrasft, the difference is that the hovertank can hover higher and has weaponry. the rest is pretty much the same idea.


Read the board, fool! OGMA STATION (NOVA REFUGE GENERAL)!

You know, the one Scorp made? If he decides in his world that doors don't exist, too bad son, nothing you can do to argue about it! The doors don't exist, period.

http://threemileisland.forumotion.org/

http://enfiladedefilade.blogspot.com/


#69 Socks

Socks

    Sergeant

  • Nova Member
  • 1,381 posts

Posted 18 September 2008 - 09:56 AM

QUOTE (Astral Pennyclawth @ Sep 18 2008, 03:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Read the board, fool! OGMA STATION (NOVA REFUGE GENERAL)!

You know, the one Scorp made? If he decides in his world that doors don't exist, too bad son, nothing you can do to argue about it! The doors don't exist, period.


Merc brings up a legit point. i.e., WHY ON EARTH ARE THERE SO MANY IDIOTS IN THIS TOPIC?!

I mean, seriously - bringing mecha into the discussion, deciding that Scorp is completely irrelevant even though he's the creator of Nova Refuge . . .

I think a new discussion thread should be started. About something else.

#70 Rabid Chaos

Rabid Chaos

    Private

  • Member
  • 63 posts

Posted 23 September 2008 - 06:45 AM

My theory of why Scorp lets this topic stay around is because it draws all the people who want to argue into one topic, where there idiocy doesn't infect the rest of Ogma Station. I still hope that idiocy here is relative, and that even the stupidest remarks would be above the norm found in the Dump. But then, as I have no intention of looking through the dump, so I don't know.
Wood and stone may break my bones, but words will make me laugh.

Posted Image

I am a Defender of Yavakaro -
What are You?

#71 Wang Fire

Wang Fire

    Accidental Mahlok Expert

  • Nova Member
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 23 September 2008 - 06:47 AM

QUOTE (Rabid Chaos @ Sep 23 2008, 03:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My theory of why Scorp lets this topic stay around is because it draws all the people who want to argue into one topic, where there idiocy doesn't infect the rest of Ogma Station. I still hope that idiocy here is relative, and that even the stupidest remarks would be above the norm found in the Dump. But then, as I have no intention of looking through the dump, so I don't know.

Or it could be because he's never on, it's the liveliest topic on the board, and the Mods honestly don't care. That could be it.

Last Series Watched: RWBY

Last Movie Watched: Girls und Panzer der Film____Last Game Played: Battlefleet Gothic: Armada

Playlist of the Moment: Panzercraft____Song of the Moment: Seven Nation Army - The White Stripes/Glitch Mob

Last Blog Entry: On Gods and Daemons____Last Book Read: Prospero Burns


#72 Kampfer

Kampfer

    Hard Core Kiwi

  • Nova Member
  • 156 posts

Posted 23 September 2008 - 03:34 PM

Leave us alone where having fun.

To become old and wise, You must first be young and stupid.

 


#73 Terran_Union

Terran_Union

    Spaghetti Crusader

  • Member
  • 30 posts

Posted 26 February 2009 - 03:35 PM

tanks rely on heavy armor and weapons while walker rely on mobility and versatility of its function and purpose.

technically, a walker is good for defense while tanks are good for offense

#74 Maverick-Werewolf

Maverick-Werewolf

    Alpha Leader

  • Forums Administrator
  • 12,177 posts

Posted 26 February 2009 - 11:34 PM

Wow. Sorry, Terran_Union, but this topic is very old. Since you just resurrected it randomly, I'm going to close it.

I'm not going to warn you or anything since you're new here and it's an innocent mistake, but please check the date of the latest post in a topic before you post in it next time. wink.gif

gallery_3_16_497424.gif


#75 Saber-Scorpion

Saber-Scorpion

    Pandinus imperator.

  • Webmaster
  • 7,918 posts

Posted 27 February 2009 - 12:04 AM

QUOTE (DS9 @ Sep 17 2008, 02:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
doesn't depend on scorp, he aint the all mighty god that desides what does what wink.gif Scorp is a cool guy, i know. but doesnt mean he is the one that makes the rules of such things. A hovertank is simular to a hovercrasft, the difference is that the hovertank can hover higher and has weaponry. the rest is pretty much the same idea.

Uh... modern hovercraft (the "air cushion" type) do not work on land. That's the main difference. And the ones in Nova Refuge do not use air cushions; they operate with a completely different, more advanced technology, which does not function properly over deep water. Thus, a hovercraft tends to sink. This is why most military hover vehicles in the Refuge are built to be amphibious.

Also, walkers don't exist either, so when I decide whether they are better than tanks, it's not exactly like I'm changing the laws of physics...

Since the topic is closed now, here is MY FINAL WORD ON WALKERS VS. TANKS IN NOVA REFUGE:

TANKS
Pros: The biggest ones can carry heavier loads than walkers, including more weapons and heavier armor, they of course cannot "fall over," they have a lower target profile, and the amphibious ones can float on water
Cons: They are slower, they cannot jump, they are less agile and unable to dodge, they are more easily blocked by obstructions (such as anti-tank emplacements or tall rocks), and they are less cool

WALKERS
Pros: They are faster than most tanks, they can leap into the air (with the aid of jump jets) to clear tall obstacles, they can step right over smaller obstacles, they are capable of using their legs as weapons (crushing, kicking, etc.), and they are awesome
Cons: They cannot carry as much weight (weapons and armor) as the heaviest tanks are capable of, it is possible to knock them over (although difficult, since they can usually get right back up), they have a larger target profile, and none of them have any capability to operate on water.

TANKS VS. WALKERS
IF a group of walkers were to engage an evenly-matched group of tanks on an open field... if the tanks struck first and had very good aim, they would probably be able to defeat the walkers since they are larger targets, while the tanks are tougher and have more firepower. However, a group of very skilled walker pilots might be able to use their greater speed and agility to counter the tanks' firepower and toughness and wear down the relatively slow tanks until they were destroyed.

IF a group of walkers were to engage a group of tanks on rough terrain with gorges, cliffs, and/or other obstacles, the tanks' maneuverability would be impaired and the walkers could use the terrain to their advantage, keeping out of the tanks' line of sight until they could close in (since the walkers would have no difficulty navigating the terrain) and finish them.

IF a group of walkers were to engage a group of tanks in an urban setting, the tanks would have to make their way down the roads, avoiding obstacles, while the walkers could leap over (or even on top of) buildings, step over obstacles, and easily out-maneuver the tanks. If the walker pilots have any skill at all, the tanks would be easily dispatched unless they had support.

These are just a few scenarios, but in general, walkers are considered superior and more advanced technology than tanks in the world of Nova Refuge. But hey, at least it's not as bad as in some walker-centric sci-fi universes, where tanks are literally nothing. tongue.gif

-Scorp

latest_comic.png

tinyicon_facebook.pngtinyicon_twitter.pngtinyicon_flickr.pngtinyicon_deviantart.pngtinyicon_tumblr.pngtinyicon_pinterest.pngtinyicon_instagram.pngtinyicon_googleplus.pngtinyicon_patreon.png

"Come a day there won't be room for naughty men like us to slip about at all..."


#76 Wang Fire

Wang Fire

    Accidental Mahlok Expert

  • Nova Member
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 27 February 2009 - 01:10 AM

QUOTE (Saber-Scorpion @ Feb 27 2009, 09:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Uh... modern hovercraft (the "air cushion" type) do not work on land. That's the main difference.

Well actually they do, just not very effectively as they have trouble with rough terrain. That's why most of them are limited to cross-water transit and then landing on a beach/dock/transport ship's cargo hold/etc. Now you know, and knowing is half the battle (the other half is shooting someone)!

Just throwing it out there.

Edit: Observe!

Last Series Watched: RWBY

Last Movie Watched: Girls und Panzer der Film____Last Game Played: Battlefleet Gothic: Armada

Playlist of the Moment: Panzercraft____Song of the Moment: Seven Nation Army - The White Stripes/Glitch Mob

Last Blog Entry: On Gods and Daemons____Last Book Read: Prospero Burns





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users